MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1514354534 · doi:10.21236/ada451628

Accelerated Solvent Extraction for Sample Preparation of Chemical Weapon Degradation Compounds

2001· report· en· W1514354534 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jay D. Sheffer, Spiros Z. Manolakos, Donna E. Swartz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolvent extractionDegradation (telecommunications)Extraction (chemistry)Sample (material)Sample preparationSolventChromatographyChemistryOrganic chemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EXTENDED ABSTRACT A commercially available accelerated solvent extractor (Dionex ASE 200) was utilized for rapid soil extraction of degradation compounds originating from Schedule 1 Chemical Weapons (CW) materials listed under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). Inert 2030 mesh Ottawa sand (Fisher Scientific) and three types of characterized soils including sandy loam, sandy clayloam, and loam (soil #1, #2, and #3, respectively from : RT Corporation) were spiked with part-per-million (ppm) quantities of various degradation compounds, including, but not limited to, methyl phosphonic acid (MPA) and thiodiglycol (TDG). The degradation compounds extracted from the soils were derivitized with 2,2,2-trifluoroN,N-bis(trimethylsilyl)-acetamide (BSTFA) and analyzed via gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC-MS) in order to determine percent recoveries and optimize the efficiency of the extractions. Results of these studies include recovery data and optimized methodology. In general, highest recoveries of the target compounds were achieved with extraction temperatures of 100°C and 150°C. Higher temperatures produced lower recoveries, possibly due to breakdown of the target compounds and interference caused by the extraction of large amounts of extraneous organic compounds. Percent recoveries obtained from soil #2 were poor for all target compounds. Inert sand and soil #1 yielded the highest recoveries for most target compounds. The target compounds originating from mustard agents demonstrated the highest recovery percentage (50-90%) of the target compounds investigated here. In addition, an environmental weathering study of spiked soils was performed to evaluate extraction efficiency following weeks of exposure to atmosphere. As expected, trends observed over time exhibit a decrease in percent recovery as exposure time is increased. However, most target compounds were detected at low concentrations after as long as six weeks of exposure to atmosphere in at least one of three sample replicates. The advantages of accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) over other soil extraction methods include a fullyautomated solvent extraction system, fast solvent extractions achieved in minutes, low volumes of solvent required, and good recoveries of compounds originating from mustard agents. However, the disadvantages of ASE extraction include the initial equipment costs and maintenance, moderate to poor recoveries of many target compounds originating from nerve agents, and poor recoveries of all target compounds achieved from soil #2. Although recoveries were poor for some compounds, detection of the target compounds was achieved following ASE extraction in all soil matrices with the exception of MPA (see Table I).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPesticide Residue Analysis and SafetyFrench-language works237,207